DOCSLIB.ORG

Written Evidence HRA0004

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Written Evidence HRA0004 The Law Society of Scotland – Written evidence HRA0004 The Law Society of Scotland aims to lead and support a successful and respected Scottish legal profession. Not only do we act in the interests of our solicitor members but we also have a clear responsibility to work in the public interest. That is why we actively engage and seek to assist in the legislative and public policy decision making processes. This response has been prepared on behalf of the Society by members of our Working Party on Human Rights. The working party is comprised of senior and specialist lawyers. The Society has been involved in debate on this topic for some time. Much of this response reflects the evidence we provided to the Commission on a Bill of Rights in 2011 and 2012. The UK Government has yet to publish the details of its plans for the repeal and replacement of the Human Rights Act. As a result, the Society’s views on these issues may evolve as the proposal becomes clearer. The working party welcomes the opportunity to respond to the call for evidence on the proposed repeal of the Human Rights Act and its replacement with a British Bill of Rights, and has the following comments to make:- We believe that the Human Rights Act 1998 (the HRA) is a key component of our society and an effective tool for the protection of our rights through the domestic courts in the UK. The HRA provides an effective means for individuals to challenge the actions of the State and seek redress in a more accessible, timely and affordable way than was possible before incorporation of the ECHR rights. The HRA has had a positive impact on the development of law and policy both in the UK and in Scotland. We therefore support the retention of the HRA as stated in our Priorities Documents for the UK General Election last year and the Scottish Parliament Elections in May 2016. However, we also accept that there is room for improvement of the Act. We believe that the HRA can be improved by the following amendments:- a) by amending Section 10 to provide a more accountable parliamentary way to amend incompatible legislation in the light of a declaration of incompatibility by the courts; b) by including Article 13 - right to an effective remedy in Schedule 1; and c) by expanding and clarifying the application of the HRA to private bodies exercising public functions or providing public services. We are of the opinion that any proposed Bill of Rights for the United Kingdom must build on and enhance the European Convention on Human Rights. A Bill of Rights for the UK could also include rights which have commonly been characterised as constitutional, for example, the right to access to justice or the right to have Human Rights determined by a court; however, arriving at consensus on this proposition may be difficult. We are cautious about including other rights which are characteristically considered as rights within one legal system in the United Kingdom, such as, “the right to trial by jury”. In Scotland there is no such right as whether a case goes to jury trial is determined by the forum which is at the instance of the prosecutor. A UK Bill of Rights could include:- a) rights which are contained in EU and other UK or devolved legislation; b) economic and social rights; c) rights contained in other international treaties, for example the Convention on the Rights of the Child or the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights; and d) the EU Charter on Fundamental Rights. On the question of whether the Bill of Rights should include identification of the citizens’ responsibilities the Society is of the view that the fundamental purpose of a Bill of Rights is to ensure that certain human rights are guaranteed and protected against the State’s capability to legislate and the court’s power to reach final decisions in a way which is contrary to those rights. These rights should be limited only to the extent which it is absolutely necessary in order to protect the common good and the rights of others. Inclusion of responsibilities is fundamentally a political question. We recognise the call to enhance the responsibilities of the citizen but do not hold to the view that a Bill of Rights is the correct place for such a statement. Many rights in e.g. ECHR have qualifications which provide a balance of the rights of the individual with competing interests. Including responsibilities is conceptually difficult in a Bill of Rights. We would suggest that a stronger judicial role may be needed if a Bill of Rights for the United Kingdom were enacted. The current arrangements under the Scotland Act 1998 provide a much stronger way of dealing with non-compliance with ECHR by Scottish Ministers than that which the HRA provides for the UK Parliament and UK Ministers. This also brings into view the issue of entrenchment of a Bill of Rights for the United Kingdom. Procedurally entrenching the Bill of Rights for the United Kingdom could be done by a special majority voting system for both Houses of Parliament and an amendment to the Parliament Acts requiring both Houses to consent to the Bill subject to the special majority. Without knowing the detail of the proposals, it is difficult to comment on what the practical impact would be. If, as we suggest, the basis of any proposal is to build upon the HRA and continue to incorporate the ECHR, the impact should be to clarify and extend the application of rights. If additional rights are to be included, this could make it easier for individuals to enforce their rights and require greater consideration to be put on specific issues (depending on the nature of the additional rights) during policy development and decision making. As long as the UK remains a party to the ECHR, the ECHR rights will be binding on the UK, and individuals will be able to take cases to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). If the ECHR is no longer directly incorporated into the UK’s domestic law, this would mean that individuals would have to go to the ECtHR and would be unable to seek legal enforcement of their ECHR rights through the UK court systems. This was the situation prior to the enactment of the HRA. The application of the ECHR could not be considered and decided on by the UK courts, so the compliance of the UK with the ECHR was decided by the ECtHR once all domestic remedies had been exhausted. The only role the UK courts had in applying the ECHR rights was in statutory interpretation where a provision was ambiguous and the courts applied a presumption that Parliament did not intend to breach its treaty obligations. Nevertheless, prior to the HRA, following a decision of the ECtHR that the UK was in breach of its obligations under the ECHR, the UK then, as now, would correct the breach to be compliant with its obligations under international law. Pre-HRA, decisions of the ECtHR still had a significant impact on the policy and law of the UK. For example, the prohibition of corporal punishment in State schools was a direct result of the decision in Campbell and Cosans v UK in 1982 which held such practices to be a breach of Article 2 of Protocol 1, and later cases on the issue of corporal punishment of children finding violations of Article 3 (see Tyrer v UK 1978 and A v UK 1998). In addition, the decision in Malone v UK 1985 on State interception of communications finding a breach of Article 8 resulted in the Interception of Communications Act 1985, with later cases extending protections from public communications networks to private. Other examples of the UK changing domestic law in reaction to decisions of the ECtHR include abolishing the prohibition of homosexuals serving in the military (Lustig-Prean and Beckett v UK 1999 and Smith and Grady v UK 1999), and changes to the provision of legal aid for civil cases in response to Airey v Ireland 1979. There were also numerous cases where the ECtHR’s finding of a breach by the UK of its obligations under the ECHR lead to a significant change in the policy or procedures of the UK. Finally, it is interesting to note that following the decision in Brogan v UK 1988 that detention without any judicial supervision was a breach of Article 5, the UK derogated from Article 5(3) on the grounds of public emergency. These examples suggest that, even though the ECHR was not incorporated into domestic law, the UK government felt obligated to recognise and address the decisions of the ECtHR. Consequences in relation to Scotland The HRA is entrenched within the Scotland Act so that it is expressly outwith the competence of the Scottish Parliament to modify the HRA. Section 29 of the Scotland Act 1998 concerns the competence of the Scottish Parliament. Law made by the Parliament 'is not law' if it falls outwith the competence of the Parliament. For the present purposes we are focusing on Section 29(d) which provides that a provision is outside the legislative competence of the Parliament 'if it is incompatible with any of the Convention rights…'. ‘Convention rights’ is defined in Section 126 of the Scotland Act as having the same meaning as in the Human Rights Act 1998. The Human Rights Act 1998 was stated by the Lord Chancellor and the Secretary of State for Justice to be 'neither devolved or reserved' (House of Lords EU Justice Sub-committee on 2 February 2016).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ideas of Equity (Pdf)
    Ideas of Equity 00A_PoE_prelims.pmd 1 15/05/2017, 21:45 STUDIES IN SCOTS LAW Series Editor Kenneth G C Reid Editorial Board Alan R Barr Sandra M Eden George L Gretton Volumes in the series 1. Ross Gilbert Anderson, Assignation (2008) 2. Andrew J M Steven, Pledge and Lien (2008) 3. Craig Anderson, Possession of Corporeal Moveables (2015) 4. Jill Robbie, Private Water Rights (2015) 5. Daniel J Carr, Ideas of Equity (2017) 00A_PoE_prelims.pmd 2 15/05/2017, 21:45 STUDIES IN SCOTS LAW VOLUME 5 Ideas of Equity Daniel J Carr Lecturer in Private Law, University of Edinburgh Lecturer in Law, Robert Gordon University EDINBURGH LEGAL EDUCATION TRUST 2017 00A_PoE_prelims.pmd 3 15/05/2017, 21:45 Published by Edinburgh Legal Education Trust School of Law University of Edinburgh Old College South Bridge Edinburgh EH8 9YL http://www.centreforprivatelaw.ed.ac.uk/monograph_series First published 2017 © Daniel J Carr, 2017 The author asserts his moral rights. ISBN 978-0-9556332-9-4 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the written permission of the copyright owner. Applications for the copyright owner’s permission to reproduce any part of this publication should be addressed to the publisher. Typeset by Etica Press Ltd, Malvern Printed and bound by Martins the Printers, Berwick-upon-Tweed 00A_PoE_prelims.pmd 4 15/05/2017, 21:45 Contents Preface vii Table of Cases ix Table of Statutes xvii Abbreviations xix 1 Introduction 1 2 Historical Understandings of Equity 14 3 Unjustified Enrichment 53 4 Trusts 104 5 Constructive Trusts 134 6 Fiduciary Law 184 7 Conclusion 219 Index 219 v 00A_PoE_prelims.pmd 5 15/05/2017, 21:45 00A_PoE_prelims.pmd 6 15/05/2017, 21:45 Preface This book is an updated version of my doctoral thesis submitted in 2009, and awarded by the University of Cambridge in 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Partnership Law (LC 283; SLC 192)
    The Law Commission and The Scottish Law Commission (LAW COM No 283) (SCOT LAW COM No 192) PARTNERSHIP LAW Report on a Reference under Section 3(1)(e) of the Law Commissions Act 1965 Presented to the Parliament of the United Kingdom by the Lord High Chancellor by Command of Her Majesty Laid before the Scottish Parliament by the Scottish Ministers November 2003 Cm 6015 SE/2003/299 £xx.xx The Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission were set up by the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law. The Law Commissioners are: The Honourable Mr Justice Toulson, Chairman Professor Hugh Beale QC Mr Stuart Bridge Professor Martin Partington CBE Judge Alan Wilkie QC The Chief Executive of the Law Commission is Mr Michael Sayers and its offices are at Conquest House, 37-38 John Street, Theobalds Road, London WC1N 2BQ. The Scottish Law Commissioners are: The Honourable Lord Eassie, Chairman Professor Gerard Maher Professor Kenneth G C Reid Professor Joseph M Thomson Mr Colin J Tyre QC The Secretary of the Scottish Law Commission is Miss Jane L McLeod and its offices are at 140 Causewayside, Edinburgh EH9 1PR. The terms of this report were agreed on 10 October 2003. The text of this report is available on the Internet at: http://www.lawcom.gov.uk http://www.scotlawcom.gov.uk ii THE LAW COMMISSION THE SCOTTISH LAW COMMISSION PARTNERSHIP LAW CONTENTS Paragraph Page SECTION A: INTRODUCTORY (PARTS I – III) PART I: INTRODUCTION 1 Partnership law reform in its context 1.1 1 The role of partnerships in the business world
    [Show full text]
  • Sexual Harassment in the Workplace
    House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee Sexual harassment in the workplace Fifth Report of Session 2017–19 Report, together with formal minutes relating to the report Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 18 July 2018 HC 725 Published on 25 July 2018 by authority of the House of Commons Women and Equalities Committee The Women and Equalities Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Government Equalities Office (GEO). Current membership Mrs Maria Miller MP (Conservative, Basingstoke) (Chair) Tonia Antoniazzi MP (Labour, Gower) Sarah Champion (Labour, Rotherham) Angela Crawley MP (Scottish National Party, Lanark and Hamilton East) Philip Davies MP (Conservative, Shipley) Vicky Ford MP (Conservative, Chelmsford) Kirstene Hair MP (Conservative, Angus) Eddie Hughes MP (Conservative, Walsall North) Jess Phillips MP (Labour, Birmingham, Yardley) Mr Gavin Shuker MP (Labour (Co-op), Luton South) Tulip Siddiq MP (Labour, Hampstead and Kilburn) Rosie Duffield MP (Labour, Canterbury) Jared O’Mara MP (Independent, Sheffield, Hallam) Teresa Pearce MP (Labour, Erith and Thamesmead) were members of the Committee during this inquiry. Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No. 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication Committee reports are published on the Committee’s website at www.parliament.uk/womenandequalities and in print by Order of the House. Evidence relating to this report is published on the inquiry publications page of the Committee’s website. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Judith Boyce (Clerk), Luanne Middleton (Second Clerk), Holly Dustin, Tansy Hutchinson, and Shai Jacobs (Committee Specialists), Axell Kaubo (Inquiry Manager), Alexandra Hunter-Wainwright (Senior Committee Assistant), Mandy Sullivan (Committee Assistant), and Liz Parratt and Simon Horswell (Media Officers).
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Ireland , Marie Lynch, Interpreting Constitutional
    Co.Co.A. Comparing Constitutional Adjudication A Summer School on Comparative Interpretation of European Constitutional Jurisprudence 1st Edition - 2006 Constitutional Adjudication and Interpretation of the Constitution Northern Ireland Interpreting Constitutional Legislation in the UK Prepared by: Marie Lynch Constitutional Adjudication – Robinson v Secretary of State for Northern Ireland : Interpreting Constitutional Legislation A distinguishing feature of the constitution in the United Kingdom 1 is that unlike most Western democracies, it does not have a singular written constitution outlining all the rights and protections afforded to the citizens within. The absence of such a mono- document delineating these rights meant that there was no concept of a higher law or a supreme law which could only be altered or amended by extraordinary methods. 2 The traditional orthodox approach in the UK was that due to Parliamentary sovereignty, all primary legislation it passes is of equal status, 3 the principles of interpretation to be applied to these Acts is that they are to be construed according to the ordinary and literal meaning of the language used. However this conventional attitude was gradually evolving and the new assessment was finally articulated in the 2002 case of Thoburn v. Sunderland City Council. 4 Here Sir John Laws in the High Court, develops ideas about “constitutional statutes” within the UK. He recommended that we should acknowledge that there are a hierarchy of Acts of Parliament: “there exists rights which should properly be classified as constitutional or fundamental…. We should recognise a hierarchy of Acts of Parliament: as it were ‘ordinary’ statutes and ‘constitutional’ statutes”. Laws L.J.
    [Show full text]
  • This Is a Publication of the Stair Society. This Publication Is Licensed by Thomas H
    This is a publication of The Stair Society. This publication is licensed by Thomas H. Drysdale and The Stair Society under Creative Commons license CC-BY-NC-ND and may be freely shared for non-commercial purposes so long as the creators are credited. Thomas H. Drysdale, ‘The Stair Society: The Early Years’, in: Stair Society 52 [Miscellany V] (2005) 243–267 https://doi.org/10.36098/stairsoc/history.1 The Stair Society was founded in 1934 to encourage the study and advance the knowledge of the history of Scots Law, by the publication of original works, and by the reprinting and editing of works of rarity or importance. As a member of the Society, you will receive a copy of every volume published during your membership. Volumes are bound in hardcover and produced to a high quality. We also offer the opportunity to purchase past volumes in stock at substantially discounted prices; pre-publication access to material in press; and free access to the complete electronic versions of Stair Soci- ety publications on HeinOnline. Membership of the society is open to all with an interest in the history of Scots law, whether based in the UK or abroad. Indivi- dual members include practising lawyers, legal academics, law students and others. Corporate members include a wide range of academic and professional institutions, libraries and law firms. Membership rates are modest, and we offer concessionary rates for students, recently qualified and called solicitors and advocates, and those undertaking training for these qualifica- tions. Please visit:
    [Show full text]
  • Law Society Complaints Procedure Uk
    Law Society Complaints Procedure Uk Die-hard Norris controlling all. Mikhail cry menacingly. Disliked Neel beshrews giocoso. Bonuses have otherwise been accounted for. Scotlandwho should make responsible for complaints handling. Directing the complaint for our attorneys. Scottish legal advice, apologise or law. We are law society complaints procedure details provided and the complaint arising from the use. Our Complaints Policy Cognitive Law. Income to and Corporation Tax payment also frequently relevant. What regulating body that complaint in law society or the procedures in the information in all your membership, which is acting for complaint is needed for? If this procedure of complaint please contact law society or advising or chief managing partner responsible for loss of completing his views on. All firms of solicitors in England and Wales will missing a complaints procedure. If you know and complaints committee in law society to providing it should be bound to. The law society about our central register and completions take longer practising in terms of the ssdt is found. If, for heart reason, Mr Gibbins is unavailable, please contact Dr Laura Brampton instead. Terms and conditions Hughes Solicitors. They will then the law charge you any solutions agreed method, then you are only if you become final responsibility for you of an independent? It just fail to illustrate how speaking the times most lawyers are now it comes to refer service and pick some believe them are talking to workshop a nasty attack when competitors who grieve this seriously enter the market. If you are law society complaints procedure before continuing instructions on the complaint? The reality is, consistent most cases, very different.
    [Show full text]
  • Consultation Reponse
    CONSULTATION REPONSE To Law Society of Scotland’s Regulation in the 21st Century: Guarantee Fund October 2015 A. INTRODUCTION The SLCC welcomes the Law Society of Scotland’s consultation1 on the Guarantee Fund. In particularly, we are pleased to see that the findings of KPMG’s independent review have been considered and the Society are now considering implemented some of the recommendations. We believe that following the KPMG review and before that Sheriff Principal Bowen’s report on Consumer Protections in Conveyancing Cases, now is the right time to consider changes to the Guarantee Fund to ensure clients and others are protected by a sustainable, effective system. Some of the changes we discuss will involve changes to legislation and it is entirely appropriate that these changes are considered at the same time the Society is proposing wider changes to the regulatory framework2. B. ABOUT US The Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC) is in independent statutory body providing a single point of contact for all complaints against legal practitioners operating in Scotland. The SLCC investigates and resolves complaints about inadequate professional services; refers conduct complaints to the relevant professional body and has oversight of complaint handling across the profession. The SLCC operates independently of the legal profession and government and aims to resolve complaints early, efficiently and effectively and to improve complaints handling across the profession. Through this work we aim to improve trust and confidence in Scottish legal services. Our annual report3 and website4 have more information on our work. 1 http://www.lawscot.org.uk/media/555164/Regulation-consultation-Guarantee-Fund-2015.pdf 2 http://www.lawscot.org.uk/media/555161/Regulation-consultation-Entity-2015.pdf 3 http://www.scottishlegalcomplaints.org.uk/media/56936/slcc_annual_report_2013-2014_- _final_electronic_version.pdf 4 http://www.scottishlegalcomplaints.org.uk The consultation to which we are responding relates only to the solicitor’s profession in Scotland.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Starting a Practice | Law Society of Scotland
    Guide to starting a practice In association with 2 | Guide to starting a practice Contents 1. Business planning ................5 4. Risk management ..............12 • Business plan • Business continuity plan • Structure • Fraud and cybersecurity • Marketing, promotion and • Professional risk attracting business • Communication with clients • Practice and file management 5. Insurance and • Practice management course client protection ....................13 • Policy templates • The Master Policy for professional indemnity insurance • Additional cover 2. Finance and cashflow ...........8 • Client Protection Fund • Cashflow • Banking arrangements • PAYE/Real Time Information 6. Legal Aid ............................14 (RTI) Registration • VAT • Making Tax Digital (MTD) 7. Practice unit options • Corporation tax and income tax and information .....................15 • Account management software Checklist and contacts ...........19 3. Compliance ........................10 • Accounts rules • Anti-money laundering (AML) • Data protection and GDPR • Incidental financial business • Officers of the firm You can read the relevant rules and guidance on our website. Where possible, this guide also provides details of where you can find more information. Rule Law Society of Scotland practice rule Guidance Law Society of Scotland practice guidance Info More information Guide to starting a practice | 3 Guide to starting a practice Congratulations on taking the first step to setting up your own practice. While establishing your own firm can bring many rewards, it pays to spend time at the outset planning how your business will operate. You will want to ensure that your new practice complies will all relevant legislation, rules and regulations. This guide is designed to help you start out on the right path by getting you to consider some of the main requirements and relevant points for starting and operating a legal practice in Scotland.
    [Show full text]
  • Response from the Law Society of Scotland
    Independent Review of Legal Services Regulation Response from the Law Society of Scotland 1 The starting point Scotland’s legal profession is one of this country’s great success stories. There are currently 11,400 practising Scottish solicitors, more than ever before. The legal sector is one of Scotland’s most competitive, with almost 1,200 law firms operating and offering quality legal advice. That sector is a diverse one, from global, multi million pound businesses to a network of smaller practices operating on the high streets of our villages and towns the length and breadth 11,400 Scottish Solicitors - of the country. more than ever before The in-house sector within the solicitor However, the contribution of the legal profession is larger and more important sector is much more than economic. than ever. In-house public sector As with legal jurisdictions around the solicitors help to deliver on national world, Scottish solicitors help ensure our and local government priorities. Private country adheres to the values of equality, sector solicitors are advising and helping fairness and the rule of law. In doing so, some of Scotland’s largest and most solicitors provide quality legal advice, important employers to grow and often in times of difficulty, distress and succeed. suffering. More and more Scottish solicitors are In announcing the independent choosing to live and work, not just review of legal services regulation, the 1,175 Solicitor firms in other parts of the UK but across Minister Annabel Ewing was clear on employing 24,000 people in cities, towns the world, retaining their Scottish the objectives.
    [Show full text]
  • The European Union Withdrawal (Consequential Modifications) (Eu Exit) Regulations 2020
    EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM TO THE EUROPEAN UNION WITHDRAWAL (CONSEQUENTIAL MODIFICATIONS) (EU EXIT) REGULATIONS 2020 2020 No. [XXXX] 1. Introduction 1.1 This explanatory memorandum has been prepared by the Cabinet Office and is laid before Parliament by Command of Her Majesty. 1.2 This memorandum contains information for the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments. 2. Purpose of the instrument 2.1 The purpose of this instrument is to ensure that the UK statute book works coherently and effectively following the end of the transition period. 2.2 It clarifies how certain terms, including EU-related definitions, should be interpreted in domestic legislation on or after IP completion day. As part of this, the instrument clarifies how cross references to EU legislation should be read. 2.3 The instrument makes technical repeals to redundant provisions within primary legislation arising from the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (“EUWA”). These are primarily repeals of amending provisions, in particular relating to the European Communities Act 1972 (“the ECA”), where EUWA has already provided for the repeal of the amended provisions. The purpose of the repeals in these Regulations is to tidy up the statute book and they have no substantive effect. 2.4 The instrument amends the Interpretation Act 1978 (and the devolved equivalents) in relation to the interpretation of references to “relevant separation agreement law” . The instrument also amends EUWA to provide for how existing references to EU instruments that form part of relevant separation agreement law and how existing non- ambulatory references to direct EU legislation should be read. It also makes consequential amendments to the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (Consequential Modifications and Repeals and Revocations) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 1(S.I.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006
    Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006 CHAPTER 51 CONTENTS PART 1 ORDER-MAKING POWERS Powers 1 Power to remove or reduce burdens 2 Power to promote regulatory principles Restrictions 3 Preconditions 4 Subordinate legislation 5 Taxation 6 Criminal penalties 7 Forcible entry etc 8 Excepted enactments 9Scotland 10 Northern Ireland 11 Wales Procedure 12 Procedure: introductory 13 Consultation 14 Draft order and explanatory document laid before Parliament 15 Determination of Parliamentary procedure 16 Negative resolution procedure 17 Affirmative resolution procedure 18 Super-affirmative resolution procedure ii Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006 (c. 51) General 19 Calculation of time periods 20 Combination with powers under European Communities Act 1972 PART 2 REGULATORS Exercise of regulatory functions 21 Principles 22 Code of practice 23 Code of practice: procedure 24 Functions to which sections 21 and 22 apply PART 3 LEGISLATION RELATING TO THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ETC Interpretation of legislation 25 References to Community instruments 26 EEA agreement and EEA state Implementation of Community obligations etc 27 Power to make orders, rules and schemes 28 Power to make ambulatory references to Community instruments 29 Combination of powers PART 4 SUPPLEMENTARY AND GENERAL Supplementary 30 Repeals and savings 31 Consequential amendments General 32 General interpretation 33 Commencement 34 Extent 35 Short title Schedule — Repeals ELIZABETH II c. 51 Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act 2006 2006 CHAPTER 51 An Act to enable provision to be made for the purpose of removing or reducing burdens resulting from legislation and promoting regulatory principles; to make provision about the exercise of regulatory functions; to make provision about the interpretation of legislation relating to the European Communities and the European Economic Area; to make provision relating to section 2(2) of the European Communities Act 1972; and for connected purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Elaine Russell
    Elaine Russell Year called: 2020 Email: [email protected] Practice Prior to calling to the bar Elaine was a solicitor in private practice for over 20 years. She has wide experience across the spectrum of complex Personal Injury and Clinical Negligence work. This includes serious injury and fatal road traffic, aviation accidents, employers’ liability, occupiers’ and public liability, industrial disease work and medical product litigation. Elaine has extensive experience in both the Sheriff Courts and Court of Session. Elaine held senior litigator status with the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, was a Personal Injury Accredited Specialist with the Law Society and was the Scottish coordinator for the Motor Accident Solicitors Society. During her time in private practice Elaine was described by Chambers UK as ‘an accomplished solicitor who sees problems before they appear; very astute, experienced and extremely professional.‘ Her main areas of experience are: Reparation Personal Injury Clinical Negligence Professional Negligence FAIs and Public Inquiries Insurance Law Health and Safety Prosecutions Regulatory Crime Property Damage Arbitration Environmental prosecutions Contract and Commercial Litigation The Faculty of Advocates T: 0131 226 2881 E: [email protected] Parliament House F: 0131 225 3642 W: www.compasschambers.com Edinburgh EH1 1RF Faculty Services Limited Registered No: 48261 Representative Cases Gallacher & Ors v SC Cheadle Hulme Ltd & Ors- [2014] CSOH 103 As a Solicitor, Court of Session action for multiple pursuers family member of deceased who died of mesothelioma. Highest reported awards in terms of section 4(3)(b) of Damages (Scotland) Act 2011 for bereavement awards for loss of society. Young v Advocate General for Scotland and Dicketts v Advocate General for Scotland- 2011 SLT (News) 38 As a Solicitor, Civil jury trial for family members of young men killed in Nimrod Afghanistan aircrash.
    [Show full text]